According to CNN and Paul Payack (supposed language guru), We, the target audience of The One, The Only, The Magnificent Barack - are too stupid and feeble minded to understand the president's speech Tuesday night.
"President Obama's speech on the gulf oil disaster may have gone over the heads of many in his audience, according to an analysis of the 18-minute talk released Wednesday.
Tuesday night's speech from the Oval Office of the White House was written to a 9.8 grade level, said Paul J.J. Payack, president of Global Language Monitor. The Austin, Texas-based company analyzes and catalogues trends in word usage and word choice and their impact on culture.
Though the president used slightly less than four sentences per paragraph, his 19.8 words per sentence "added some difficulty for his target audience," Payack said."
Well excuse the hell out of me but I understood it just fine. Now given, I read the transcript - didn't listen to His Dithering Droolyness, just can't stomach listening to him. Sorry but I got over his articulate self long long ago. (Oh, and Mr Payack - it is "fewer" sentences not "less" sentences - Mr Language Guru should have better grammar than that)
Apparently Mr Payack thinks we would have problems comprehending this sentence :
"That is why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation's best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge -- a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation's secretary of energy."
Now, I've read words and sentences written by pretty much any of you who may be reading this post, and I've got to say - you've all written more complex sentences with bigger words and I for one have understood you just fine. Which word here is supposed to go over our heads? I've got to admit, I'm pretty sick of the "Nobel Prize-winning" phrase as though it means something highfalutin' - I mean, since The O, Al freakin'Gore, and Jimmeh Carteh got one it hardly means anything at all - so big fat whoop.
Payak says the previous sentence made the O sound aloof and out of touch and that he (the O) should use more common language to speak to us poor ignorant buffoons in his audience. Is Payak actually saying that the O should speak more like W? Just sayin'
I'm thinking Mr Payak is as woefully out of touch as ol' Tin Ear Barack himself.
Don't know what grade level this post would be judged to be - probably not as high as it could have been had I taken time with my vocabulary - but just zipping this out I have an average word length of 5.8 letters here to Obama's professorial 4.5, a sentence average of 22 words to the O's 19.8 (when I drop out all the quotes), and I bet you understood every word.
Does this give me a graduate degree? Because that would be Sweet!
"President Obama's speech on the gulf oil disaster may have gone over the heads of many in his audience, according to an analysis of the 18-minute talk released Wednesday.
Tuesday night's speech from the Oval Office of the White House was written to a 9.8 grade level, said Paul J.J. Payack, president of Global Language Monitor. The Austin, Texas-based company analyzes and catalogues trends in word usage and word choice and their impact on culture.
Though the president used slightly less than four sentences per paragraph, his 19.8 words per sentence "added some difficulty for his target audience," Payack said."
Well excuse the hell out of me but I understood it just fine. Now given, I read the transcript - didn't listen to His Dithering Droolyness, just can't stomach listening to him. Sorry but I got over his articulate self long long ago. (Oh, and Mr Payack - it is "fewer" sentences not "less" sentences - Mr Language Guru should have better grammar than that)
Apparently Mr Payack thinks we would have problems comprehending this sentence :
"That is why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation's best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge -- a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation's secretary of energy."
Now, I've read words and sentences written by pretty much any of you who may be reading this post, and I've got to say - you've all written more complex sentences with bigger words and I for one have understood you just fine. Which word here is supposed to go over our heads? I've got to admit, I'm pretty sick of the "Nobel Prize-winning" phrase as though it means something highfalutin' - I mean, since The O, Al freakin'Gore, and Jimmeh Carteh got one it hardly means anything at all - so big fat whoop.
Payak says the previous sentence made the O sound aloof and out of touch and that he (the O) should use more common language to speak to us poor ignorant buffoons in his audience. Is Payak actually saying that the O should speak more like W? Just sayin'
I'm thinking Mr Payak is as woefully out of touch as ol' Tin Ear Barack himself.
Don't know what grade level this post would be judged to be - probably not as high as it could have been had I taken time with my vocabulary - but just zipping this out I have an average word length of 5.8 letters here to Obama's professorial 4.5, a sentence average of 22 words to the O's 19.8 (when I drop out all the quotes), and I bet you understood every word.
Does this give me a graduate degree? Because that would be Sweet!
|
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
I love how it went up without the quotes! Have you seen this web site: http://goodgoogledy.blogspot.com/2010/06/excuse-me.html
It has your post as an average grade of 9.04, when I took out the quotes your grade went to 9.3... hahahahaha
Didn't Yessir Arafart get a Nobel paperweight, too?
BTW, I never listen to Barry's pompous orations, either. The cadence of his speeches makes me nauseous.
for sure the cadence is part of what drives me absolutely nuts.
The left believe themselves far superior to the mere mortals cohabiting the planet with them... And for the most part that's fine... until their condescension reaches fever pitch and threatens to drown all rational thought with dark fury. We are not the morons they suppose us to be and we'll prove it come November.
I think the problem is that most of us with speech comprehension abilities past the 9.8 or whatever level tend to look for, um, CONTENT. Funny how that works.
Content is, of course, the last thing Obambi wants to give us. For him it is all about the rhetoric, the slight of hand. Content he can be held to - he'd rather leave us with impressions not expectations...
Yes, we'd have to get ourselves a bona fide professor of language to explain what Bracky O'Bammy said. Not because we don't understand English, but because we don't understand Chicago Politics Doublespeak.